• dannno's Avatar
    59 replies | 833 view(s)
  • dannno's Avatar
    59 replies | 833 view(s)
  • dannno's Avatar
    Today, 04:45 PM
    I read your post, I don't think it's impossible it just still seems really unlikely and I haven't seen enough good evidence for it. If Trump's sole purpose was to keep Rand out, which was my original theory long, long ago, well I didn't even support Trump until well after Rand was out. The mainstream media continued to commit suicide, and still continues to do so, in order to try to get Trump out of power. Once Trump won the GOP nomination, why not loosely get behind him? Whey keep up the charade at 100% intensity? Do you think they feared Gary Johnson? If so, at some point Gary Johnson was completely a no-go, it was shortly after the Allepo incident I believe. Why keep going? Why the Russia bullshit after the election?
    52 replies | 554 view(s)
  • dannno's Avatar
    Today, 04:40 PM
    Right, exactly, I think you have it. Trump wants to work within the global economy and make trade deals with other nations, while keeping US national interests first. The people that those of us around here refer to as "globalists" generally tend to put America last.
    11 replies | 188 view(s)
  • dannno's Avatar
    Today, 04:38 PM
    What do you really think he meant? Was he using the word globalist in the noun or adjective form? Do you think there can be globalist spectrum, or is globalism binary? Would you prefer someone who is a globalist, but NOT a nationalist? Do you think somebody can be both a globalist and a nationalist?
    11 replies | 188 view(s)
  • dannno's Avatar
    Today, 03:30 PM
    You mean the one where he professes his love of vaChina?
    52 replies | 554 view(s)
  • dannno's Avatar
    Today, 03:28 PM
    Huh? That has nothing to do with what I'm saying. The media is trying to say that Trump is flip flopping on his position, but they are making up what his position is. His actual position is regarding the re-negotiation of trade deals between the US and Mexico and the US and Canada, but the media is portraying his tactics as his position, when the tactics are a means to his goals and there is more to one tactic at his disposal. So the media is trying to pretend that when he switches tactics, he is flip flopping, when he is actually using the different tactics to get to the same goal. This has nothing to do with whether it is a good idea or bad idea, it just has to do with whether Trump is being consistent on his position, which he is in this case.
    52 replies | 554 view(s)
  • dannno's Avatar
    Today, 03:15 PM
    He is a globalist and a nationalist. What's wrong with that? Sounds like a potentially pretty good combination to me.
    52 replies | 554 view(s)
  • dannno's Avatar
    Today, 03:14 PM
    Well they don't need to pay for attack "ads" all they have to do is sick the media they own on him. And yes, I recall it quite vividly.
    52 replies | 554 view(s)
  • dannno's Avatar
    Today, 02:44 PM
    Why did they need ANYBODY to vote for either of them if they were the only ones running? Do you think they were scared of Gary Johnson??
    52 replies | 554 view(s)
  • dannno's Avatar
    Today, 02:41 PM
    You keep specifying NAFTA.. NAFTA is a trade deal. Trump's position is to re-negotiate the trade deals between the US and Canada and the US and Mexico. One way to do that would be to abolish NAFTA and come up with new trade deals. Another way to do that would be to re-negotiate NAFTA. Either of those options fall within Trump's goal of re-negotiating the trade deals with the US and Mexico and the US and Canada. So when Trump decides one day he is going to re-negotiate the trade deals by abolishing NAFTA via executive order, and the next day he decides he is going to take an alternate route in order to re-negotiate the trade deals between the US and Mexico and the US and Canada, that doesn't mean he changed his position. He just changed his tactic.. How many more times do I need to explain this for you to understand? Or are you just pretending not to understand? Are you trying to make your side look bad?
    52 replies | 554 view(s)
  • dannno's Avatar
    Today, 02:29 PM
    Of course the bad press helped Trump, if you recall, I kept telling CPUd during the election that she was helping Trump get elected by posting all that bullshit. But my question remains: Why destroy the credibility of the mainstream media just to get Trump elected when they had a toolbag puppet running against him? Obviously they were ok with Hillary winning, so why put in all the effort, which destroyed their credibility and just let them run a more normal election and let the two puppets battle it out? They already had two puppets in place ready to go.
    52 replies | 554 view(s)
  • dannno's Avatar
    Today, 02:24 PM
    What is the point of debating if you won't read my posts? The next line I wrote was: I didn't say anything about Trump's position being to re-negotiate NAFTA, that is just ONE OPTION he had on the table. His position is to re-negotiate the trade deals. You are the one getting wrapped up in bullshit semantics. His position is to re-negotiate the trade deal between the US and Canada and the US and Mexico.
    52 replies | 554 view(s)
  • dannno's Avatar
    Today, 02:12 PM
    What the fuck are you talking about? The whole point of this thread is that Trump changed his position, which is incorrect, Trump has never changed his position. Trump has always said that we would re-negotiate a trade deal with Mexico, and with Canada. That is still his position. Whether he re-negotiates NAFTA and calls it NAFTA or whether he abolished NAFTA and re-negotiates a new trade deal with a different name or the same name is totally immaterial, he has always been open to taking WHATEVER route was necessary in order to re-negotiate the trade deal. Until you can show me where Trump has changed his mind regarding re-negotiating the trade deal with Mexico and Canada, which you can't, his position has not changed. His tactics have changed, but his goals and his position on the issue has stayed the same.
    52 replies | 554 view(s)
  • dannno's Avatar
    Today, 02:09 PM
    LOL.. ya.. the media that said every single day for 2 years that Trump is "literally Hitler" and lied about everything he said and twisted it into something he didn't mean every single day in order to make him look bad, handed him the election.. I hate to break it to you, but they were attempting to hand the election to Hillary.. One would think that was glaringly obvious. If you think they were trying to give Trump the Presidency, by attacking him every day, do you have any idea what kind of conspiracy that would entail? Do you have ANY evidence? I think almost everything is a conspiracy, yet this one is literally out of the park, I just can't see how that could be organized an executed like that for the purpose of getting him elected.. and the other big question, why?? Who cares? Why not just let them battle and let Hillary or Trump win? Why did Trump have to win? What advantage does that give them over Hillary? They would be able to get way more globalist shit done with Hillary.
    52 replies | 554 view(s)
  • dannno's Avatar
    Yesterday, 06:41 PM
    What is wrong with high interest rates?
    45 replies | 522 view(s)
  • dannno's Avatar
    Yesterday, 05:50 PM
    Yes, and that all could have easily fallen apart if Trump didn't react how they wanted him to react to their false flag attack, which was very likely planned the day before Gorsuch's nomination on purpose. You think Trump is the only one trying to play 36D chess here? The deep state has been doing it for centuries, that is where we learned this shit from.
    49 replies | 555 view(s)
  • dannno's Avatar
    Yesterday, 05:14 PM
    lol.. you are so wrong it is absolutely ridiculous. Again, the advantages Trump gained had NOTHING to do with Syria. One of my liberal friends who HATES Trump with a passion told me the next morning how glad he was that Trump bombed Syria. This friend represents the general sentiment of the brainwashed leftist media. The mainstream media completely changed their tune on Trump, and all the Russian stuff they were trying to use to impeach him totally disappeared. He gained massive political capital with the two biggest and most powerful countries in the world. The most important part of Gorsuch's nomination, which is the confirmation, WENT THROUGH the day after the bombing. It doesn't matter when it was scheduled, the fact is he got it through and it can easily be argued that bombing Syria may have brought some deep state reps to vote for Gorsuch's nomination. And the bombing only lasted 15 minutes, and it was an empty airbase. It may as well have been a dream.. I was and am against it on principle, but man, I'm not sure there has ever been a more successful military mission in the history of the world..
    49 replies | 555 view(s)
  • dannno's Avatar
    Yesterday, 04:55 PM
    See, this is exactly what I was talking about. Semantics. You need to think about what I'm actually saying here a little deeper. Ask yourself: What is NAFTA? Is it any treaty, in the past, present or future between the US, Canada and Mexico that is called "NAFTA"? Or is NAFTA the CURRENT treaty between Mexico, the US and Canada? The truth is, you can refer to EITHER of those as NAFTA, and so can anybody. That leads to a lot of confusion, but it is the nature of language. So if Trump wants to re-negotiate the treaty between Mexico, the US and Canada, and still call it NAFTA, then we would effectively withdraw from the current incarnation of NAFTA. So in some regards, the title of the infowars article is correct. But the title of the infowars article is NOT correct from the perspective that Trump has always, and will always intend to have some sort of trade agreement between the US and Canada and the US and Mexico in place, and it may very well end up being called "NAFTA". Again, it depends on the definition of "NAFTA" that is being used and both definitions are correct. Now the other question is, if there is going to be a treaty between the US, Canada and Mexico, does it matter if the trade agreement is called NAFTA? Maybe to the mainstream media, but no, in reality it doesn't matter. What matters is the contents of the trade agreement, not what the name of the trade agreement is. Just like The Patriot Act was no more patriotic because of it's name, but it did change people's perception about what was in the bill. So in the infowars report, when it says Trump wants to withdraw from NAFTA, they are saying that he wishes to withdraw from the current incarnation of NAFTA and re-negotiate a trade agreement. That was Trump's position 20 or 30 years ago, it was his position a year ago, it is still his position today. No amount of propaganda will change that - but you can change people's perception of things very easily, which is why it is important to be careful.
    52 replies | 554 view(s)
  • dannno's Avatar
    Yesterday, 04:30 PM
    I didn't say zerohedge is fake news, I am saying they are using fake news as their source to report a lot of BS stuff lately. Honest people can get caught up in bullshit. I mean, nobody has come up with an argument to what I said originally - and that is - Donald Trump has NEVER wavered on his position on this issue. Re-negotiate trade deals. Pretty simple. Zerohedge needs to get back to its anti-MSM roots instead of embracing the MSM. Ron Paul has done a pretty great job of avoiding the MSM bs while criticizing Trump.
    52 replies | 554 view(s)
  • dannno's Avatar
    Yesterday, 04:27 PM
    ........right But like in the video I posted in the other thread on the topic, Ron Paul would still vote for the tax cuts. I guess if you just read headlines rather than listening to the content, you would never know that..
    45 replies | 522 view(s)
  • dannno's Avatar
    Yesterday, 04:23 PM
    It was insinuated with your "Make NAFTA Great Again" comment. It never was great, Trump never thought it was great. I don't even think America was great, but it has been pretty good. I would like to see Trump make American pretty good again, as opposed to watching Hillary reign over some hellish communist landscape. If you had said "Make NAFTA Great" that would have been a reasonable comment. I'd prefer to abolish NAFTA, but if that is not going to happen I wouldn't mind seeing it re-negotiated by the man who wrote The Art of the Deal.
    52 replies | 554 view(s)
  • dannno's Avatar
    Yesterday, 04:19 PM
    Pretty sure he was glad Trump beat Hillary, although I don't think he thinks there will be as significant of a difference as we will end up seeing once Trump curtails our foreign policy. Dude, all I'm saying is that Trump has always had the position that he wants to re-negotiate our treaties with other countries, and that is still his position. Is that NOT accurate?
    52 replies | 554 view(s)
  • dannno's Avatar
    Yesterday, 04:16 PM
    I dunno, it might upset some people.
    45 replies | 522 view(s)
  • dannno's Avatar
    Yesterday, 04:09 PM
    Zerohedge used to be one of the best altmedia news sources out there.. ever since they went anti-Trump, they have been caught often falling into the same bullshit narratives as the mainstream media. Very sad.
    52 replies | 554 view(s)
  • dannno's Avatar
    Yesterday, 04:06 PM
    Actually Trump never thought NAFTA was a good deal, but hey, buying into the latest horseshit mainstream media piece has been really popular the last couple years, including sadly, around here.
    52 replies | 554 view(s)
  • dannno's Avatar
    Yesterday, 04:03 PM
    What are you talking about? When did Trump say he wasn't going to re-negotiate our trade deals? When was that NOT his position? I'm pretty sure he has held the exact same position on this issue for almost 4 FUCKING DECADES or more, so why the fuck are you continuing to listen to the lying bullshit mainstream media? It's not good for your brain.
    52 replies | 554 view(s)
  • dannno's Avatar
    Yesterday, 03:59 PM
    This is all fake news, he hasn't changed anything. Trump has always said he will re-negotiate trade deals like NAFTA. That is and always has been his position. It's in his speeches as a candidate, and it is contained in the article above. The media likes to play games with semantics... when Trump the candidate says he doesn't like NAFTA and wants to re-negotiate, the media would say he wants to abolish NAFTA, and not bring up anything about the re-negotiation. When Trump the President says he doesn't like NAFTA and wants to re-negotiate, the media says he flip flopped.. It's fucking retarded, I recommend not listening to a single word from the mainstream media.
    52 replies | 554 view(s)
More Activity

2 Visitor Messages

  1. View Conversation
    naw, campaign mode doesn't work. they wont put that out till the game is released.
  2. View Conversation
    you still playing sc2? they updated like 6 times since i added you, lost all my contacts
Showing Visitor Messages 1 to 2 of 2
About Captain Bryan

Basic Information

About Captain Bryan
Occupation:
I work at an arcade.
Political Campaign Skills
Graphics:
Graphic Artist

Signature


I support Ron Paul.

Statistics


Total Posts
Total Posts
720
Posts Per Day
0.23
Visitor Messages
Total Messages
2
Most Recent Message
05-25-2010 10:48 AM
General Information
Last Activity
11-23-2012 12:15 PM
Join Date
09-04-2008
Referrals
0

14 Friends

  1. ArrestPoliticians
  2. AuH2O AuH2O is offline

    Member

    AuH2O
  3. axiomata axiomata is offline

    Member

    axiomata
  4. BarryDonegan BarryDonegan is offline

    Member

    BarryDonegan
  5. Conza88 Conza88 is offline

    Member

    • Send a message via MSN to Conza88
    Conza88
  6. dannno dannno is online now

    Member

    dannno
  7. eOs eOs is offline

    Member

    eOs
  8. Fox McCloud Fox McCloud is offline

    Member

    Fox McCloud
  9. heavenlyboy34 heavenlyboy34 is offline

    Member

    heavenlyboy34
  10. Jeremy Jeremy is offline

    Member

    Jeremy
Showing Friends 1 to 10 of 14
Page 1 of 2 12 LastLast
No results to display...
No results to display...

04-26-2016


04-25-2016